An Ideology of Self-Hatred

Gary Cooperberg
February 7, 2005

The following unsigned editorial appeared in today's Haaretz newspaper. It is followed by my response.

A Ruse called Referendum

The demand for a referendum on the disengagement plan has been raised again and again - not because of a true democratic need, but because the settlers, as always, have managed to put their cause at the top of the public agenda.

The settlement enterprise began in Hebron, during Passover in 1968, without a referendum. Had the citizens of Israel been asked, at any stage in the development of this enterprise, whether they wanted to set up a settlement in Hebron or build mansions on the outskirts of Nablus or Gaza City, which their children would have to defend as soldiers, and to pave roads there at a cost of billions of shekels, it is doubtful whether they would have agreed. At that time, therefore, the settlers chose to operate far from the public eye and to rely on lobbying in the corridors of power.

Referenda are not part of Israel's political culture. Public opinion polls show that a large majority of the public believes that disengagement serves the state's interests. It is nevertheless possible that a referendum could produce the opposite result, since only those who care deeply about the matter would take the trouble to participate. Most of the public is used to voting in general elections, through which people express their opinions on a variety of matters and empower the Knesset, the cabinet and the prime minister to set policy, and even to change it if circumstances so dictate. The minute the government loses the public's confidence in its policies, as reflected in the loss of its Knesset majority, the public is once again asked to express its opinion. Just as the public was not asked in a referendum whether to privatize the banks, cut welfare allowances or go to war, it should not be asked about the disengagement.

The settlement policy in the territories would not become more reasonable or moral if it won the support of a majority in a referendum, just as it didn't when the right oversaw its implementation after winning an electoral victory in 1977. The residents of Gaza and Nablus would not participate in such a referendum, even though the settlements' existence affects their future most of all. Most of the Israeli public always treated the territories as a bargaining chip and knew that the withdrawal would someday happen; that is why the territories were never annexed to Israel.

Those who chose to live in the settlements were not forced to go there; they chose to live in communities that existed on sufferance and were known to have an expiration date, even if this date was not known in advance. The "surprise," on account of which they now demand a referendum, is artificial and manipulative.

The government of Israel is the body that decided to establish the settlements, even assisting them with taxpayers' money (without a referendum), and it is the body that is now deciding to withdraw from some of them. If the settlers are demanding a referendum in the Messiah's name, there is no point in discussing the issue with them, since no decision will satisfy their faith. If they are asking because of their misery, they ought to be reminded that there are many in Israel who are more miserable, but are not receiving financial compensation for their misery or for the fact that they have no roof over their heads. And if the settlers are arguing in the name of democracy, they must once again be told that the decision to remove the settlements of Gush Katif was made by the cabinet and Knesset - and in a far more open and democratic fashion than the decision to establish them was.

My response:

I agree with the editor of Haaretz in his labeling a referendum a "ruse". What disturbs me is the sarcastic effort to libel "settlers" as a separate "anti-Israeli" click which have always interfered with the good of the state. The fact is that every Israeli is a "settler". It was only by settling the Land that Israel came into being! The author blithely ignores the reality that the Arabs living in Shechem and Hebron are enemies of the Jewish State, and bemoans the fact that these enemies have not been invited to participate in a referendum deciding upon whether or not the government should surrender to the PLO, this despite the fact that he opposes referenda in general. It is also interesting how he expresses his belief that, even were a referendum held and succeeded to reject the surrender, it wouldn't be valid, "since only those who care deeply about the matter would take the trouble to participate." What a master of deceit and demagoguery to pen such an opinion of democracy!

Perhaps the author doesn't remember that the Six Day War of June 1967 was an attempt to totally destroy the Jewish State and murder all of its Jewish citizens. Clearly he feels that Israel has an obligation to apologize to our would-be annihilators and award them parts of our country which we won in a war which they started. Even were these lands not part of our ancestral inheritance, we won them in a war of defense and have no reason to hand it to our enemies merely because they failed to achieve their aim to destroy the Jewish state.

Why is it that so many of our leaders cannot accept the concept of victory in a war. . . especially a war of self defense? Do they not understand that had we lost the war there would be no Jewish state and most of us would have been murdered? Why do they insist, even at this late date, that we have no choice but to accept and even nurture a continued enemy presence within our own sovereign borders; and even worse, that we help to create a new enemy Arab sovereignty on Jewish soil from which we actually will expel all Jewish residents! Give me one historic example of any country in the world which would display such an example of a death wish for itself.

I agree that a referendum is merely a ruse. . . a last ditch hope that maybe the expulsion can be at least pushed off, if not stopped altogether. While I disagree that the majority of Israelis really would support such a suicidal concept, it is my contention that democracy is irrelevant when it comes to dismantling our homeland. The people of Israel does not have a right to commit national suicide, even if the majority wants to do so.

Those who call observant Jews fanatical dreamers, are themselves more fanatical than those whom they choose to label and libel. How can any rational individual assume that we enjoy real peace with Egypt and Jordan today? Yes, we watched the ceremonies on television and saw the signing of peace treaties (like the one with Arafat on the White House lawn). But only a self-deceiving fool can honestly believe that any Arab nation has or even desires a true peaceful relationship with the Jewish State. Freeing murderers from our prisons will not make the PLO love us. The only way to accomplish that is our committing suicide. What hurts the most is that we have Jewish leaders and news editors who are dedicated to helping them.